Federal Judge Rules Against New York's Outdoor Gathering Restrictions
U.S. District Judge Gary Sharpe ordered New York officials to not enforce any outdoor gathering limitations, if people are following social-distancing requirements.
June 26, 2020 at 04:42 PM
4 minute read
A federal judge on Friday pushed back against New York state's COVID-19 gathering limits, granting a preliminary injunction in a case that challenged restrictions on houses of worship.
U.S. District Judge Gary Sharpe ordered New York officials to not enforce any outdoor gathering limitations, if people are following social-distancing requirements.
According to his order, the officials are also prevented from enforcing indoor gathering limits against the plaintiffs that are greater than restrictions placed on companies in phase two of the state's reopening plan. That provision is also stipulated on people following social-distancing requirements.
The order is tied to a case filed earlier this month by two priests and three Orthodox Jewish residents of Brooklyn. The lawsuit, filed in the Northern District of New York, listed Gov. Andrew Cuomo, state Attorney General Letitia James and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio as defendants.
The lawsuit argued that social-distancing rules are not neutral policy but instead a "content-based regulation of First Amendment-protected activity." The litigation argued that while the defendants imposed strict gathering limits for some activities and groups, they permitted large protests over the death of George Floyd and the killing of Black Americans by police.
Limiting the size of synagogue congregations or mandating "drive-in" services for congregants unduly burdened the plaintiffs' religious beliefs, the suit said, arguing the mass demonstrations were "exempted" from such restrictions.
In his decision on Friday, Sharpe said the wide limits on executive latitude were exceeded.
"It is not the judiciary's role to second guess the likes of Governor Cuomo or Mayor de Blasio when it comes to decisions they make in such troubling times, that is, until those decisions result in the curtailment of fundamental rights without compelling justification," he wrote. He also noted that New York, at the moment, is well situated when it comes to the coronavirus infection rate.
His order states that offices and certain retail shopping operations were allowed to open in phase two at 50% capacity, but houses of worship are beholden to a lower indoor capacity standard.
Sharpe also pointed to comments from Cuomo in which he publicly expressed support for the protests. De Blasio has made similar comments too.
Cuomo and de Blasio, high-profile leaders in the state, could have just discouraged the protests by citing public health and stopped short of condemning their message, Sharpe wrote.
Instead of encouraging a "flagrant disregard of the outdoor limits and social distancing rules," the leaders could have used discretion to suspend enforcement for public safety, he wrote.
"They could have also been silent. But by acting as they did, Governor Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio sent a clear message that mass protests are deserving of preferential treatment," Sharpe wrote.
New York has permitted in-person graduation ceremonies too, if they are outdoors and have no more than 150 people, something that's an exception from limits on outdoor gatherings, according to the ruling.
"There is nothing materially different about a graduation ceremony and a religious gathering such that defendants' justifications for a difference in treatment can be found compelling," Sharpe wrote.
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
Court System Names New Administrative Judges for New York City Courts in Leadership Shakeup
3 minute readRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
Trending Stories
- 1Orange Belongs to All: U-Haul Suit Argues Rival Public Storage Cannot Claim the Color
- 2Continuing Consolidation: The Biggest Legal Tech M&As of 2024
- 3FTC Announces HSR Final Rulemaking Impacting Premerger Filings
- 4NJ Cut Down on Open Judgeships in 2024, But Dozens of Vacancies Linger
- 5How to Add PR When You’ve Already Taken an ‘L’
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.